There have been three theories doing the rounds over the years (the opinions of various magazine writers and others, of course).

One writer claimed director Stuart Baird didn't get it - and was the wrong man for the job. I know Marina Sirtis criticized him. He appeared to have forgotten Michael Dorn's name during the commentary for the film. And I read that he had called LaForge the wrong name several times. It's also been stated that he hadn't seen TNG. I, personally, feel that he sounded very detached during the commentary for the film, only really being enthusiastic about technical details.

Then there are some who have said that it was a Shinzon film that happened to guest star TNG characters. Others have said it was too derivative of earlier adventures. I don't recall anyone other than Picard doing much in the film. At least GENERATIONS, FIRST CONTACT and INSURRECTION appeared to attempt to give development to others (some more than others, I know).

The final theory I heard was that the film was released a bad time. Wasn't it December 2002? Wasn't it the same month as one of the HARRY POTTER and LOTR films? Some suggest a spring or summer release would have been better. But would it have mattered?

I saw the film at the cinema - and word of mouth being what it is, I recommended that others wait for the DVD or TV airing. Had it been as good as the fourth film (my favourite!), I'd have frog-marched my friends into the cinema and demanded they see it. I'd have walked up to strangers and insisted they buy a ticket. So maybe the "it was released in December and was up against Potter" theory is a bit of a cop-out.

Any views? Or any theories of your own? I am saddened that NEMESIS was the last word for big-screen TNG. I wanted one more movie after that, maybe even with John de Lancie's Q in.

Have to agree that it was a crappy story done poorly. A Romulan duplicate of Picard (who didn't really look like him?) Who killed the entire Romulan Senate? Data is destroyed but is actually not killed, and is yet ANOTHER duplicate?

To recall every detail for a more complete discussion, I would have to rewatch that movie again. Please don't make me do that. I've always been nice to YOU...

I enjoyed TNG on the big screen, more than the small screen. FIRST CONTACT was exciting whilst I found INSURRECTION to be a good, solid story (I never understood the critics' views on it). How tragic that the last word for TNG on the big screen was NEMESIS.

I remember a "Star Trek Magazine" article, around 2004/05, where Michael Dorn was interviewed - and he claimed the TNG cast were definitely up for at least one more adventure. Shame.

At least, in my humble opinion, THE FINAL FRONTIER has a good story buried in there somewhere. I did enjoy the encounter between Kirk and "God". The film could really have explored "God" more, I felt; and if it had done that, and other aspects had been different, I feel it could have been a solid entry.

In an alternate universe, there's a good version of THE FINAL FRONTIER.

They brought in a screen writer who didn't know the property, but who was considered highly bankable (he had just written Gladiator). My understanding is that he and Brent Spiner were friends, and Spiner talked him into it. They then basically told him they wanted a TNG version of TWOK. So he basically stole the structure of TWOK (death and return of Data, villain connected to the captain's past leading members of a race bent on seizing power who gains control of an illegal superweapon, etc.). They then followed what became the TOS film recipe after ST IV, namely trying to plop in humorous character moments all over the place. So it was all forced and contrived.

Though it was a much better movie, Nemesis is really where the problem began, as soon as they decided to jettison the character relationships which had been developed over years in the TV series, and just turn Picard and Data into Kirk and Spock and reduce everyone else to supporting cast who each got handed a 'moment' in each movie.

THE FINAL FRONTIER is a harmless visit with old friends. Its heart is in the right place, despite its major flaws.

NEMESIS is easily the worst of the films. A disservice to the TNG cast and mythos. So unfortunate that's how we left the characters. "All Good Things..." was a much better way to see those characters off.

Hmm..I actually prefer it to INSURRECTION. As that previous entry was the low point of the TNG movies for me. It was just so inconsequential. And that scene at the end of the kid lecturing Data on him needing to have a little bit of fun every day, was just unbearable!

NEMESIS at least tried to progress the characters and have a larger than tv feel to it. And I liked that Dr Crusher and Picard had some discussion time in the movie. It never sat right with me that he seemed closer to the 'guest stars of the week' in the previous two films.

But yeah, there are no excuses for the dune buggy scene. I also don't like the killing of the senate at the start either. Feels like an unnecessarily brutal start to the movie.

Patrick Stewart should've played his own clone. I think that he would've shined as Shinzon. Seeing Stewart in both roles, opposing himself, would've been a memorable movie. This was the original intention, but unfortunately they changed their minds.

Picard's "clone" being younger than he is serves as further support for my theory that all the adventures (in every iteration of TREK) are taking place in Picard's head, post GENERATIONS. The subsequent movies are a series of male menopause gratifications, ending with Picard beating his younger self.

Picard's "clone" being younger than he is serves as further support for my theory that all the adventures (in every iteration of TREK) are taking place in Picard's head, post GENERATIONS. The subsequent movies are a series of male menopause gratifications, ending with Picard beating his younger self.

In that context the gratuitous dune buggy sequence actually makes sense. Add super-heroic gun shooting Picard in FIRST CONTACT and bagging the girl in INSURRECTION to that too. He now has no familial obligations, with his brother and nephew killed offscreen in GENERATIONS -- which gives him permission to "be his own man". Add all that up and you get a proactive male adventure fantasy with a cadre of capable associates that would make Clark Savage Jr. proud!

Patrick Stewart should've played his own clone. I think that he would've shined as Shinzon. Seeing Stewart in both roles, opposing himself, would've been a memorable movie. This was the original intention, but unfortunately they changed their minds.

+++++++

There were any number of Kirk vs. Kirk stories in TOS, but we never did get a Picard vs. Picard story!

Hmm..I actually prefer it to INSURRECTION. As that previous entry was the low point of the TNG movies for me. It was just so inconsequential. And that scene at the end of the kid lecturing Data on him needing to have a little bit of fun every day, was just unbearable!

***

I liked that.

Wasn't one theme in that film about stopping to smell the roses, appreciate life, appreciate time, etc? Not the main theme, but one minor theme.

I have a vague memory of a TNG episode where Picard was kidnapped and replaced by his more interesting double. Can't remember the title, but I do recall thinking that the crew should have kept the clone (mind you, the rest of the beggars on that ship were a pretty smug and self satisfied bunch, so...).

Not quite the same thing, but one of the few episodes I watched all the way thru involved Picard, Guinan and some other crew being turned into children by a transporter glitch. Eventually they were "restored", but not after some sturm und drang about Li'l Picard being unsuited for his role as Captain, even tho he retained his full memories and skills!

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum